I agree the average live 2/5 player is a lot worse than they used to be, but back then I was a lot worse than I am now. That being said, I haven't sat in a 2/5 game in the past year where I didn't feel I was the best, or at least second best (possibly grossly incorrectly assuming that) player at the table. Definitely a lot of edge out there in the 2/5 games I play in.

Not saying this is you, but just about everyone at the table considers themselves one of the best players at the table. I've found the more I've learned about the game, the more I realize I probably am not nearly as good as I think I am.

FWIW since I've left sfla I've basically never seen anyone good but imo it's a mental leak to be thinking this way. I mean reading that sentence I had to think bc I just never think like that in a poker room and I had to look back on my last 6 months and think "was I generally the best player at my table?" But I mean who cares. All I'm thinking about each session is which table has the best lineup and I'm never curious if someone is better than me or not. I just dont have the energy to care.

The very best player I've played with was in sfla. I wasn't concerned with being better than him or outplaying him. I was concerned with learning his very unorthodox approach to live poker. I want to make money. My ego can be absorbed with other things, for example my unmatched fishing skills and my incredibly good looks.

Many people never encounter a situation where they are clearly the worst person at a given task. Then when you plop them at a poker table where they can't actually see what other players are really doing, and RNGesus bails them out in a big pot or two, they're suddenly crushers.

I know there are some players I run into that are better than I am in general, or better at a specific game (PLO). But even when I look around and think that I'm probably the best *overall* player at a given table, there are still players that are better at different parts of the game that I can learn from by observing them. But at the end of the day it doesn't really matter as you're stuck adjusting to the lineup you have.


One thing to note about the quality of games changing over time is that there's an inherent selection bias in players that stick around. The super bad spewtard will eventually either run out of money and quit, or figure out how to spew a little less. The ones with unlimited pockets are rare and likely to lose interest. So as those really bad players drop out, the overall skill level of the game rises if the influx of new bad players is slow (which I think it has been in the last 4-5 years). The same holds for just normally bad players, it just takes longer.

I may come off as arrogant with this, but its just the way it is. The more i play the more i realize how few leaks i have compared to my villains, and how much i know about relevant pokerknowledge compared to them. Not to mention the ability to adjust, and exploit the live game setting for each individual villain alongside the constantly ongoing dynamics each game. And it shows in my winrate also, been crushing for the last 1000 hours at 12 BB hour steady rate. My longtime dream is to play fulltime on the westcoast, either Las Vegas or LA (or a mix of both), and i am closer to achieving that dream than ever before as my roll have been growing steadily.

Its not very strange either as most of my opponents never work on their game seriously. They watch a Doug Polk video here and there or a session from Pokernight in America, but thats it. They have mental leaks, they tilt off buyins, they get bored and make light stackoffs they shoudnt and so on.

I have a couple of good friends who are also solid winning players (in the same games i sit in) wich i routinely debate with about spesific hands,strategy approaches and ways to exploit certain players- and i cant state how important that is for honing your game. You can have blindspots kind of leaks that you arent really aware of, that other players can help you to be aware of- so you in the next chapter are able to work on those leaks. If you have leaks/sweet spots/weak links you dont know about, you certainly arent in a position to fix it either.You just cant fix a problem you dont know excist. This is a huge trap i see for many players, really huge.

Petrucci - you don't sound arrogant, just accurately assessing your relative skill level.

You are lucky to have good friends who are also good players. I know no-one who plays poker and have struggled to slowly improve my game through reading books and this forum. Lacking honest feedback from others means I've definitely taken ages to discover and fix leaks.

I think it also affects your confidence. You get a boost talking to poker playing friends. I just get concerned looks from my friends and actually expend mental energy justifying the time I spend on poker.

I'm hoping playing more regularly and making friends with some good players will help.

Thanks, good to know it didnt sound that crazy or out of the ballpark in terms of arrogance

Look, when i started out on the livescene i didnt have any others to discuss strategy with either. I took a chance when i got invited to a homegame after playing online for 3 years or so, i didnt knew anybody there and i remember i was frightend as hell. Guys sitting on huge stacks of like 2000$ playing huge pots left and right- in a 1-1 game, and i bought in for like 150$ just trying to get my feet wet. Lol talk about Bambi on thin ice.

I did one very smart thing though during that start, wich i also would advice other people in your situation to do: i identified who the 2-3 of the best players in the game was, and then i tried to suck up as much knowledge/tips/tricks from them as i possibly could. Like i tried to observe at the table what they did in terms to be big winners in the game, and after that i tried to incorporate the best bits and pieces of their game into my own game. If i had questions for them i simply asked them after game in a friendly manner, or when they had a smoking break on the balcony. If you ask with a respectful curious manner and is able to listen, its my experience that nearly every good winning player is willing to give you fantastic free advice or food for thought.

If you have that approach chances are you will be building a network of people you know in the community, and maybe on long term develope friendships with some of them.

Just my few cents on the topic man.

Thanks, I'm just starting to make more of an effort socially at the casino but this has encouraged me that it is really worthwhile.

Just go for it yeah, i guarantee you that its worthwhile- on so many levels. So many players cant ever swallow their pride, they let their ego block the path of developing their game to the next level.

If you cant identify and aknowledge other good winners in the game, its hard to imagine what that kind of player looks like right. Its good training just to being able to spot out the big crushers, the majority of players in a given room have so so many false assumptions about who the longterm winning players really is.

A big turning point for me was when one of the very good aggro LAGs in the game had beaten me in a huge pot, and i felt really owned after the pot got pushed to him. I felt that he was able to put me on my exact two cards. You know the feeling you can get if you lose a big pot,wich the hand got you to doubt yourself or feel insecure about your own abilities. That is a sign your touching a nerve right. The guy won my money that evening- but i managed to exchange it in knowledge money cant buy when i discussed the hand with him afterwards, and he gave me some pointers on how he owned me in that particular hand, what areas of my game i should work on- that kind of stuff.

So I had my first really terrible session live yesterday.

I'd won £2650 over 86 hours buying in at 40-70bb. I went into yesterday's session buying in at 100bb and trying to play a little more aggressively/looser to try to win a little faster. Trouble is missed a lot of flops, had to fold a lot of hands postflop, missed draws and just basically got owned!

I finished £700 (3.5buy ins) down in 10hrs while I only won £650 over the previous 20hrs.

Now I realise I made a few mistakes in this horrible session but overall I did as well as I could with the cards I was dealt. What I've realised is that, because I'm trying to win a roll, I had previously quit easier sessions in order to not have > 10% of my roll in play. I'd also been over cautious in order to prevent possible losses and thereby failed to win maximum value when it was available.

Towards the end of this hortible session a good pro player said I struggled because my 100bb stack was so small compared to the 300-400bb stacks most of the regs had. He said I had little fold equity pre or post because all the deepstack were desperate to get in the pot against each other. Last week they changed the rules so you can buy in to match the deepest stack. Within an hour or two of tables starting everyone has 300bb+.

Naturally this lack of fold equity would be great if I had actually hit any hands but missing all night just drained buy in after buy in.

I should add that although I had weak players to my right I had 3 and then 4 solid regs (better than me anyway!) to my left all session.

So I don't know where to go with buy in amounts now. I feel like my smaller buy ins and cautious style previously netted me minimum wins when I was running good. Those wins don't look like they are enough to cover my losses when I run bad.

I notice earlier Petrucci you recommended 70bb for building a roll. Do you think that would work in my super deepstack game? Should I stick to cashing out above 10% of roll on table (which I think limited my wins previously)? Should I consider just buying in deep and if I bust out so be it, I just have to come back to poker when I save some more money?

Also am I over worrying about one bad session? In my now 96 hours I've been down mid session £300 twice, £500 once but only posted 3 losing sessions at -£90, -£20 and - £2. This £700 loss feels massive to me but maybe it's not a big deal?

Being friendly at the tables can get you invited to home games which is great for your winrate when the players are bad, and great for your poker network if they're decent and you can talk about the game/hands with them.

It's also good because it can get the fishy players to softplay you because they like you, or give you free information.


Beyond all the winrate benefits of being sociable at the table, you meet a lot of really interesting people from different walks of life at a poker table. I know mechanics, jewelers, ticket hustlers, lawyers, drug dealers, and I'm pretty sure a guy that would 'disappear' someone if I needed it.

Here's my graph of the last 6 or so years of live play, not many hours and half were in the last year or so (running hot makes it easy to play a lot)

Mostly 2/5, some 1/3 and 5/10 NLH, some 1/2 and 5/5 PLO

Yeah I know that feeling of good LAGs being one step ahead of you. That's my other worry, I'm definitely outclassed by a few of the regs in my game. I fear being in pots with them deepstacked and they know it.

They got their skills through experience. I'm too under rolled to feel confident playing deep against the regs but need a big stack to take advantage of the fish and to build experience. Catch-22: I need a bigger roll to play well and improve so i can win long term but I can't get a bigger roll without winning it!

My opinion remains yes, 70 BB is a nice stack depth when youre trying to build a roll up with very limited amount of buyins. As soon as you get enough to 12 buyins 100 BB each, i would start buying in for 100 BB. But less then that i think 70 accomplishes a few good things for you.

Youre not extremely short like you are when buying in for like 40 BB, and its a stacksize that is particulary good against other deeper stacks- because you get paid off alot easier due to they automaticly feel like "you have so small stack". So you may have to employ a pretty tight approach, because big chunks of your winrate will be to getting paid off on your big hands. Flopped sets, QQ+ and AK hands and so on. Some limp reraises with monsters can work really well with that stack depth if table plays deep and lots of raises goes multiway to flop. If youre up a buyin and want to bank a profit, just cash out.

Edit: also it makes it easier on your part with a short roll to avoid sitting deep stacked against the other skilled regs that you feel is better than you. That battle is longer ahead in time, and not a battle/challenge you need to attack right now imo.

But the key of course is to play the stackdepth you buy in for in an appropriate manner. Either if its 40,70 or 100 BB.

@ rage

Buying in deep in a game where there are 3 or 4 better players than us sounds like an absolutely horrible idea, imo. It's actually quite likely this table might not be beatable with that many better players sitting at it.

Unless you consider yourself one of the better deepstack players at your table, I would actually recommend buying in shortish and just playing nit tight ABC, which will own all the deeper stacked players who will correctly playing loose against each other but incorrectly playing loose against your shortstack. The most difficult adjustment will be what to do when doubling up (where table changing, if that is an option, is probably best).

ETA: Here's a simple question for you regarding buying in deep to cover the fish: do you ever see the fish stack off deep lightly? In my experience, this is one of the biggest myths of poker, cuz in my experience I simply don't see it (although I could definitely see the possibility of people outplaying fish with the worst hand due to the fish not wanting to stack off deep with mediocre hands, but I get the feeling that is not what we are talking about since you seem to be concerned about not hitting hands). The fish are actually more likely to stack off with lol holding when shorter / to shorter stacks since it is "only" $200 or whatever. You'd be much better off taking a fish to value town $100 at a time for 10 times over a session than thinking you're going to get his $1000 stack in one hand (cuz the latter simply ain't gonna happen, at least, in my experience). But, as always, your experience may differ.

Gimo;goodluckG

Home games were the best thing to ever happen to my live game. I was mostly an online player at mid to high stakes PLO, then transitioned to a home game that had a mixture of absolute whales to high stakes pros and playing with pros who were better than I was made my game what it is today.

Fwiw two weeks ago I saw a guy stack off on a 25699 board (diamond flush came otr) with black Q7. He check raised, then called off otr, for about 200bb extra on the all in he faced.

If you ever want to just talk some PLO as it's off topic here feel free to shoot me a pm. Obviously there are coaching videos and whatnot of people with higher ability than I, but if you want actual dialogue I can answer whatever.

Any possibility of exploring deep stack at a lower level? I realize sometimes it's hard to find the opportunities, but it's not that uncommon to find some tables where the average stack is well above the table max BI. Try sitting at those and simply remain at the table longer should you build your stack up quickly.

Thanks for the advice guys. Really appreciate it.

So I'm deffo going with 70bb buy ins again. I won £2,650 that way already, I hopefully can do it again.


Re. Smaller tables:
We have 1/1 tables too but rake is 10% compared to 1/2 at 5% and both are capped at £10. I sometimes play 1/1 while waiting for 1/2 but assumed rake was unbeatable. Maybe I should give it a try just to double check how bad the fish are. Thoughts on beatability appreciated.


GG you are right - my biggest mistake yesterday was to stay seated. Table changes weren't available but I should have just gone home. I guess after such a long winning streak I felt like i could take a shot at dealing with the regs - hubris, I can't, certainly not OOP and barely IP. That's hubris too, some of them still own me from OOP!

Re. fish, they won't pay off really badly unless they have 2pair+ but they also telegraph their hands so you can get folds - if you have enough chips behind. But yeah, it's usually £100 at a time you get out of them so probably I get the bulk of what's easy to get buying in short anyway now I think about it.


Re. What to do when I double up (this has been a big point of indecision for me!). Hopefully you guys can advise. Table change rules are same stack for same stakes unless you are gone from table for 2 hours.

My options are:

1) Switching between stakes:
Cycling between 1/3 and 1/2 is bigger buy ins and better players, 5% rake capped at £10 + £1 loyalty tornament prise pool.
Switching 1/2 and 1/1 means half my time at 10% rake, £10 cap + £1 loyalty tourney.
All tables are min buyin 40bb, max buyin initially 200bb and thereafter to cover deepest stack.

2) I could just take 2 hours out but it is difficult enough fitting evening/nights poker in with daytime hours as it is.

3) I can just go home but then travel costs-per-hour-played go up and it takes longer to accumulated enough hours to see whether I'm actually winning or not.


One other thought I have - if I do enough hours and survive it I can get into the loyalty tournament and play the regs "for free", no risk to my BR. It's a good tournament every 5 weeks top prize usually £25,000. Could solve my BR issues too. Also I'm much more likely to win that through luck than I am to beat the regs through skill in the cash games

+1

Vv good point, GG. If a fun player is loose pre but nitty post, that player could have heaps in front. But hes a dead seat. It's all about exploiting their tendencies. No sense of sitting deep when the $$$ isn't in play.

Yall realize how difficult it is to make a good hand right?

If somebody is deep and playing nitty, your biggest exploit is to way over bluff them.

^ this is precisely what the good regs do to me after I double up from 100bb

Having been on the receiving end I can confirm that sitting IP to a nitty somewhat scared-money deep stack is a very profitable situation.

You want to flat their opens IP and look to steal on the flop or the turn when given the opportunity.

My adjustment (as the OOP scared-money deepstack) was to tighten up in EP/MP and start checking more flops, double barreling more often when I did cbetflop and putting in flop check raises with a wider range.

I adjusted too slow though because I didn't want to be beaten into a tighter game as that meant accepting the regs were exploiting me.

Turns out stubbornness and pride don't make for good bankroll management. Who'd have thought?

The real killer blow to someone trying to build a roll though is to put pressure on around the committment threshold. Once someone realises you are "looking only for the best spots" and aren't going to put your stack at risk without the near nuts, you're dead.

May as well cash out and go home.